Analysis of 2 Translations of Beowulf

Grendels Description Comparative Analysis Beowulf is a great pick of Anglo-Saxon literature that can be, and has been, translated in multiple ways. Of the many a(prenominal) outstanding translations, two of which be by Burton Raffel and Seamus Heaney, different ways of opus ar portrayed. Grendels description is written quite differently in both translations. Heaneys translation is much homogeneous to the Anglo-Saxon style of writing than Raffels translation.In Heaneys translation, he uses a kenning to describe the Danes whereas Raffel uses bare(a) wording to get the same story across. Heaney calls The Danish people Ring-Danes to get his translation to be encompassing(prenominal) to the Anglo-Saxons style of literature. This use of a kenning causes the commentator to be more familiarized and to divulge understand how the story was originally written or, rather, originally composed. Raffel, on the other hand, plainly calls the Danes warriors to make the musical passage clea r and easy to read.By translating Beowulf this way, Raffel is simplifying the writing and turning it into a more modern style of writing by not using kennings, therefore, taking away from the original storys metaphorical aspect and wander way from the Anglo-Saxon style of literature but making it more understandable to the less than innovative reader. Another way Heaney nears the Anglo-Saxon style of writing and Raffel digresses from it is the use of poetry and poetic devices in the translations. Heaney uses head rhyme in nearly every line of his translation.For example, in line twenty five, blundering back with the butchered corpses, repeats the letter B three times. He translated Beowulf by making sure the same meaning is transferred into the new language, (English), and also do sure that the writings style was also transferred. This makes even the translation sound like a poem that can be sung just as Beowulf would have been many years ago. Raffel, on the contrary, does not u se alliteration or other poetic devices as much.In line four, alliteration is indicate by repeating the H in hall and harps, however, this isnt the case in many lines. An example would be, line one, A powerful monster, living down. By doing this, Raffel is turning what was initially a multiform poem into a short story, setting it up in a way that is very similar to any modern novel. It is quite clear that Heaneys choice of diction is far more conglomerate and sophisticated than Raffels choice of diction, which is very simple.Heaney uses many words that may be hard to embrace due to the fact that they are not often used in conversations or even in many other writings. An example of a word that Heaney uses in his translation that may not be understood right away is prowler. This word, which means stalker, is a word that may not be dig by someone with a weak vocabulary. It intensifies the story greatly, however, by allowing the reader to visualize Grendel sneaking up on his prey , showing that he has a deceitful genius.Raffel, on the other hand, simply describes Grendels actions. He skips from Grendel being a powerful monster to him growling due to the excessive noise from the hall. Grendels personality is not explained or stated as in Heaneys translation. By Raffel missing this little piece of information about Grendel, the reader has an easier time comprehending what is currently occurring, though it is slightly less informative.Heaney and Raffels translations are both phenomenal works of literature. Heaney, however, concentrates more on how poetic and similar the translation is to the original writing to give the reader an idea as to how the original story was composed. Raffel strays slightly away from the poetic Anglo-Saxon writing style and simplifies Beowulf, making it easier to read. Both of the translations tell the same story, however, how the tale is told can impact the reader in different ways.